Does Aristotle have a scala naturae in which humans are ranked higher than the other animals? Is it better to be human than to be something else? This chapter shows that Aristotle's sequence of ...
More

Does Aristotle have a scala naturae in which humans are ranked higher than the other animals? Is it better to be human than to be something else? This chapter shows that Aristotle's sequence of functions of the soul is not ordered in terms of honour but in terms of distribution. Greater complexity is not a mark of superiority. The animals' lack of what Aristotle called eudaimonia does not mean that they are lacking in happiness or success in their own pursuits. Rather, simplicity is an ideal; psychological complexity is (for Aristotle) a mark of things that fall short of perfection, as is evident from his discussion of the complex motions of the planets. Texts discussed include Metaphysics A, De anima, Nicomachean Ethics X, De partibus animalium, De Caelo, De incessu animalium, and Aristotle's discussion of slaves and women in Politics.Less

On the Disadvantages of Being a Complex Organism: Aristotle and the scala naturae

Catherine Osborne

Published in print: 2007-01-25

Does Aristotle have a scala naturae in which humans are ranked higher than the other animals? Is it better to be human than to be something else? This chapter shows that Aristotle's sequence of functions of the soul is not ordered in terms of honour but in terms of distribution. Greater complexity is not a mark of superiority. The animals' lack of what Aristotle called eudaimonia does not mean that they are lacking in happiness or success in their own pursuits. Rather, simplicity is an ideal; psychological complexity is (for Aristotle) a mark of things that fall short of perfection, as is evident from his discussion of the complex motions of the planets. Texts discussed include Metaphysics A, De anima, Nicomachean Ethics X, De partibus animalium, De Caelo, De incessu animalium, and Aristotle's discussion of slaves and women in Politics.

Aristotle’s teleological explanations are most successful in the domain of living things, and there is good reason to think that organisms are the objects of his most important teleological remarks. ...
More

Aristotle’s teleological explanations are most successful in the domain of living things, and there is good reason to think that organisms are the objects of his most important teleological remarks. The attempts to apply teleological explanations to less complex entities (such as the elements) and more complex entities (such as cities) have been judged by history a failure. His explanations of organisms, on the other hand, have been celebrated by molecular biologists, embryologists and developmental biologists, and advocates of adaptationism in evolutionary biology. Teleology as a scientific proposition seems to require a sufficient level of complexity, but to break down at levels of too much complexity (at the level of human behavior, or of society, for example) or too little complexity (at the level of inanimate entities, for example). But whatever the scientific verdict on Aristotle’s teleology, it is clear that his conception of intrinsic ends has important implications for axiology (the theory of value). For he has shown how it is possible to identify objective goods, independent of human minds, and to avoid the dilemma between radical egalitarianism on the one hand and arbitrary or self-serving hierarchy on the other.Less

Conclusion

Monte Ransome Johnson

Published in print: 2005-11-03

Aristotle’s teleological explanations are most successful in the domain of living things, and there is good reason to think that organisms are the objects of his most important teleological remarks. The attempts to apply teleological explanations to less complex entities (such as the elements) and more complex entities (such as cities) have been judged by history a failure. His explanations of organisms, on the other hand, have been celebrated by molecular biologists, embryologists and developmental biologists, and advocates of adaptationism in evolutionary biology. Teleology as a scientific proposition seems to require a sufficient level of complexity, but to break down at levels of too much complexity (at the level of human behavior, or of society, for example) or too little complexity (at the level of inanimate entities, for example). But whatever the scientific verdict on Aristotle’s teleology, it is clear that his conception of intrinsic ends has important implications for axiology (the theory of value). For he has shown how it is possible to identify objective goods, independent of human minds, and to avoid the dilemma between radical egalitarianism on the one hand and arbitrary or self-serving hierarchy on the other.